FYI: router BillyGoat is offline

[Kyle Williams]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Michael <cozzi at cozziconsulting.com> wrote:

> Michael wrote:
>
>> Kyle Williams wrote:
>>
>>> reject 0.0.0.0/8:* <http://0.0.0.0/8:*>
>>> reject 169.254.0.0/16:* <http://169.254.0.0/16:*>
>>> reject 127.0.0.0/8:* <http://127.0.0.0/8:*>
>>> reject 192.168.0.0/16:* <http://192.168.0.0/16:*>
>>> reject 10.0.0.0/8:* <http://10.0.0.0/8:*>
>>> reject 172.16.0.0/12:* <http://172.16.0.0/12:*>
>>> reject 66.109.20.52:*
>>> accept *:80
>>> accept *:443
>>> accept *:43
>>> reject *:*
>>>
>>
>>   Kyle,
>>
>>   One more question if you would indulge my curiosity. What service was
>> the course of the "spam"?
>>
>>   Michael
>>
>
>   I'm replying to my own post because my comment makes me look like a
> moron.
>
>   I was wondering if the complaint was about abuse of whois servers or web
> based services.
>
>   Michael
>


Web based services.
I see you caught was I was looking into.  From what I was able to tell, the
large amount of request to whois server where just that, lookups on a whois
server.  Yet, they take up a very small portion of the overall network
traffic that moved through my node.

I would have to say that blocking whois servers through Tor wouldn't help
the speed of the overall network.  I'll have more stats on this later.


- Kyle
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/attachments/20090630/98dff9a9/attachment.htm>